"What we are up to" - Feb 3rd edition
- Thread starter Yoshiro
- Start date
Oh Yosh, just when I think I've found everything to love about you...
...you go and do this.
...you go and do this.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
You could always sign up for the Hawken beta with my referral
[url]http://playhawken.com/?ref=luu2i6bs[/URL]
Hmmmm
Upvote
0
I always wondered why the IS2 kept coming up...I was under the impression that it wasn't the greatest. Long reload times, poor armour penetration and low ammunition capacity hehehehe.
Also heavy tanks are mechanically unreliable, suck at redeployments and so forth. IS-2 is something of a mutant anyhow, IS was designed for 85mm gun and when it was found lacking the design was upgraded to the 122mm gun which of course added more weight and stress on the suspension.
With IS-3 they could have gone with the superior 100mm gun but Stalin's namesake tank could not have a weenie, it needed to have a masculine gun. Ditto for canning the by far superior T-54 design for a decade after the initial production run.
Upvote
0
Those who want to chill can play Relaxed
Those who want to twich console can play Realism
Those who want to play those two in one with slower gameplay can play Classic
TWI is catering these modes for all people it seems. I started to see that after that Williams staff guy made that post here with what they thought about in their office and you guys are still bickering about it? Seriously? TWI is catering to what seems to be...all now.
Me? I am actualy having a great time with SDK but it keeps crashing so I am upset about that but its whatever.
Oh and lets lock this thread I think its outdone it self
Those who want to twich console can play Realism
Those who want to play those two in one with slower gameplay can play Classic
TWI is catering these modes for all people it seems. I started to see that after that Williams staff guy made that post here with what they thought about in their office and you guys are still bickering about it? Seriously? TWI is catering to what seems to be...all now.
Me? I am actualy having a great time with SDK but it keeps crashing so I am upset about that but its whatever.
Oh and lets lock this thread I think its outdone it self
Upvote
0
Exactly. It's getting quite ridiculous. That said, I don't necessarily agree that RO Classic shouldn't exist as a separate mode.
If we wanted to play RO1 so bad, we wouldn't be asking for RO2 to become RO1 -- we'd be playing RO1. But that is not what we want, which is perfectly clear if you bother to read any of the long winded posts by me or hundreds of others in the last few months.
RO2 brings many important gameplay enhancements that are extremely welcome: less clunky movement, better collision models, features such as mantling over objects, less recoil for SMGs, the first person cover system, increased suppression, the ability to switch to ironsights from scopes, smoother MG deployment (for the most part), better movement between stances, bullet penetration, the ability to carry more than 1 primary weapon, a squad system (even if it is dysfunctional), and many others.
All of those features are things I LIKE in RO2 that can't be found in RO1. And they are welcome to stay. The problem has been that the omission or botching of several things such as ludicrous amounts of zoom, a lack of weapon sway, no effect of stamina on shooting, no specific wounding-based handicaps, a wounding system that features magical bandaging, and many of the other things listed ad nauseam are so detrimental to gameplay that they overshadow the positive changes. But it's important to remember that there are definitely many positive changes.
RO Classic, or whatever you want to call it, looks to remove or heavily subdue those things that in our opinion kill RO2's gameplay so that the positive additions in the game can shine through. I'm not going to start demanding that TWI change their existing modes -- even if "Realism" is essentially the same as "Relaxed Realism" as of right now.
If improved gameplay comes via a totally new "RO Classic" mode, then that's fine. I support any decision that will move RO2 in the right direction -- new mode or not.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I should clarify. A perfect emulation is absurd. I think emulation was a bad word to use in the first place. A true sequel to RO1 is what we all want. It just so happens that everyone thinks of something different.
Anyway, Roclassic mode or not. What is the point? I mean, if they wont fix realism mode to make it the way we want it, then should they make the ROClassic mode? Of course! If that is the only way they will begin to develop the true successor as they see it I would think that would be the only good avenue of approach.
Anyway, I'd still rather see an "emulation" of ro1 on the new engine then either of the other two modes. Maybe since they are making this new mode it will be more along the lines of a true sequel.
Anyway, Roclassic mode or not. What is the point? I mean, if they wont fix realism mode to make it the way we want it, then should they make the ROClassic mode? Of course! If that is the only way they will begin to develop the true successor as they see it I would think that would be the only good avenue of approach.
Anyway, I'd still rather see an "emulation" of ro1 on the new engine then either of the other two modes. Maybe since they are making this new mode it will be more along the lines of a true sequel.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
You manage to both state the obvious and miss the obvious at the exact same time. Of course it demonstrates lag. Every time you play a game on the internet, there is lag. The point was that your claim that "dying behind cover" doesn't exist in the game currently is completely and utterly wrong. It happens now. In addition, the demonstration video was also done on a server with latency roughly twice that of the average connection, to give a rough idea of what would be the typical "die behind cover" result of a client-side model. It's barely different than what happens now. So again I ask you, what problem is lag-compensation bringing to the game? Judging from what you've been posting, I really don't think you understand the actual mechanics and effects of the different network models.
They have no control over most of that latency, however, which is the travel-time on the internet between clients and servers. They could make it so that the server processes every single bit of information sent to it in a single millisecond, yet most of your latency will still be there. Even then, it's not consistent, you still have all the variance that's natural to internet traffic.
Though it makes perfect sense that the system worked better for RO1. The characters move much more slowly, and the animations were slower and more rigid. That results in it being much easier to judge lead and reduces the variability in where they could go between when you fire and when the shot lands on the server.
Upvote
0
Anyone else has a headache after reading this thread??
I've just read the whole thread. The whole 20 pages, starting with page 2 (as I'd read the first one previously). Do I get to get an achievement?
Boy, what a ride, what a ride... I'm getting the full-length emotional roller-coaster from release time again, it seems.
A few things that caught my attention and I'd like to mention, before my sanity is shattered beyond hope of recovery:
* Sojuz brought up an excellent point. There should be no IS zoom, and there should be separate zoom that starts off unzoomed and zooms in over time. This would emulate the lining up of IS, which is a thing quite a few people also commented about.
This solution, however, seems to have no prevailing support.
In connection with this point, someone mentioned how the removal of the extra zoom will bring us back to pixel hunting. Now, while (it is a feeling I got) many long-time RO players want that back (or rather: do not want such extreme zoom, recognizing that artificially gimped sighting capabilities will yield a more realistic, protracted firefight), someone else also indicated how the pixel-hunting approach will, I don't want to say "not work" (as I haven't tested it), be dramatically more difficult than in RO1 for a very simple reason: player models do not stand in such stark contrast to the rest of the environment any more. Now, there's a difference between hunting for a pixel that stands out and one that blends in. And I'm not really that big on having my eyes scorched out by screen glare. I'd leave the sighting capabilities largely as they are — a zoom which would be superior to the current IS zoom (even if only slightly), a zoom which would represent focusing on an area is something I'd, nomen omen, like to still see. I'd rather have my chances to hit be affected by sway and stance alone, than by a combination of those with a sight limitation.
* I'm not so sure about SL's SMG getting the axe. Simply lock out superfluous SL slots and successively open up them as new players join (and lock them out again as they leave)
* I'll be sad to see lockdown go. It felt so fair to reward good defence. But the players have spoken (was it really such an overwhelmingly undivided opinion? I was more under the impression that it was rather split — also in the long-time players department, asking for tweaking, not simple removal), so I guess it's time to conform or sod off. A point duly noted.
* Sad to see the variety of arsenal go. What I'd like to see is not an unlocking system, but the options to chose from. Like a sniper on a smaller map could opt for a smaller magnification scope and on a bigger one — a better one. Or an MG intending to go closely with the assault would go for the drum, and a support MG would opt for a belt (for Germans). Same for the rifles with and without the bayonet — take the bayo, but experience more sway; skip it and hit that Fritz in the iris (network latency and leading skills permitting
). PPSH opting for the drum, or the sickle mag (although I recognise this would require modelling a "fourth" model — i.e. one with fire selector and the sickle mag). Options, choices, things like that (and, hopefully, in the future — the MN carbine :IS2.* Sad to see the bleeding system go, instead of being reworked. On the point, will the speed penalty after a leg wound (although, somewhat alarmingly, the announcement specifically mentions "being shot in the feet") remain, or will the effect be a temporary one, like in RO1?
* Not too over-joyed about SL spawn removal, but I can live with that much easier than without the zoom.
* Disappointed that the peripheral indicators are not being reworked (although I suspect this may be due to limited resources and TWI wanting to get on with "that damned Classic RO" mode as quickly as possible). Since you've copied ARMA's mechanic, why not go the full monty and have them react to friendlies (and — ideally — any movement, like the flying pieces of paper) and not react through smoke and foliage. Well, maybe further down the road, to borrow a phrase.
Cheers, looking forward to the changes, all in all.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
...
* Sad to see the variety of arsenal go. What I'd like to see is not an unlocking system, but the options to chose from. Like a sniper on a smaller map could opt for a smaller magnification scope and on a bigger one — a better one. Or an MG intending to go closely with the assault would go for the drum, and a support MG would opt for a belt (for Germans). Same for the rifles with and without the bayonet — take the bayo, but experience more sway; skip it and hit that Fritz in the iris (network latency and leading skills permitting
...
Agree'd to everything Kant said, and just wanted to highlight this. Choices prolong the longevity of a game. An unlock system without the ability to customize hampers it.
I'm also not really in favor of taking the SL's semi/smg, I'd rather reduce the amount of SL's. As it is now, you're often stuck with just 2-3 guys not knowing they're in your squad anyway.
Edit: Oh and *PLEASE* consider making your avatars battle chatter optional!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Oh man I would love to see player collision. Nothing breaks my immersion more than the ability to move through players. I have played games with worse spawning situations than ROOST and RO2 and I still prefer player collision every single time.
Upvote
0
Yoshiro, would it be possible to remove the 'unranking' of servers with some custom server settings? I think it'd make a lot more people happy if the amount of options available to the server were increased with these ideas and allow for individual server hosts to pick and choose what they want to see in the game. Right now that's somewhat limited because nearly every server option in the custom game mode unranks the server.
And an unranked server is a dead server.
Edit: that is to say, don't add a new game mode but instead expand the custom game mode and allow the new options to not unrank the server. Plus the old ones regarding weapon limitations, it's a bit weird that turning off the MKB unranks your server.
And an unranked server is a dead server.
Edit: that is to say, don't add a new game mode but instead expand the custom game mode and allow the new options to not unrank the server. Plus the old ones regarding weapon limitations, it's a bit weird that turning off the MKB unranks your server.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
So far the changes sound pretty basic, and I hope with time it will get closer to the ideas community had. I would like to see systems that was introduced in RO2 done right, like bandaging and squad leader spawning, not removing them to get the RO1 feeling.
Upvote
0
